6 ms·

> I don't get it. The schadenfreude is because libertarians seem unwilling or unable to acknowledge the fact that violence trumps rules or contracts. When the

> I don't get it. The schadenfreude is because libertarians seem unwilling or unable to acknowledge the fact that violence trumps rules or contracts. When their pie-in-the-sky "micronations" face this unsurprising fact - typically at the hands of real nations, they act surprised every single time.

anon84873628 3y ago
I can't speak for Libertarians but I thought they were well aware of the coercive power of violence; the whole point is to build a state that does less of it...
- pjc50 3y ago
  As has been discovered, that doesn't prevent some other state from doing violence to you. The irony of doing this in former Yugoslavia is astonishing. Yes, states can fragment and borders can move .. at a considerable cost in human life. You can see it happening today in Nagorno-Karabakh, as well as the much more visible attempt by Russia to move the borders of Ukraine.
  - anon84873628 3y ago
    Again, this is surely not a new discovery for these people. TFA is obviously their biased explanation of events. But the behavior of the Croatian authorities could still be "surprising" if it was substantially different from past interactions. E.g. lack of formal written notice.
- sangnoir 3y ago
  > the whole point is to build a state that does less of it A state is only a state when it can defend its territory. At the individual level, the praxis of property rights is that something belongs to you if the person with the biggest stick says it is - this is typically the state (libertarian utopia's excluded).
- toofy 3y ago
  [flagged]
dfee 3y ago
In the US, many libertarians are supportive of an unfettered second amendment. One reason for this support, is perhaps the explicit acknowledgment that violence trumps rules or contracts.
- Barrin92 3y ago
  it's not that sort of violence that matters. A bunch of provincial homesteaders with guns don't constitute an army. Any small nation that is going to survive is going to look like Israel or Taiwan, militarized, armed to the teeth, with discipline, cohesion and state capacity. One of the funniest experiments with this kind of thing I ever read was a small town in the US being overtaken by libertarians, only to succumb to... bears. (as the citizens could neither organize waste regulations, public garbage disposal, or prevent one crazy guy from feeding the bears in the first place) https://unherd.com/2020/12/libertarianism-never-ends-well/ https://unherd.com/2020/12/libertarianism-never-ends-well/
  - patrickaljord 3y ago
    > Any small nation that is going to survive is going to look like Israel or Taiwan, militarized, armed to the teeth, with discipline, cohesion and state capacity. And protected and funded by the US ;)
    - zdragnar 3y ago
      So is (almost) all of Europe. Only four countries besides the US actually meet their obligations to fund NATO, and though they've given more by GDP than the US to Ukraine, it isn't by much.
      - dragonwriter 3y ago
        NATO defense spending targets aren’t an obligation (well, they aren’t a spending obligation, just an obligation to make it a policy goal to move toward a spending target) and aren’t “funding NATO”. That’s a double-misrepresentation popularized by Russian propaganda proxies seeking to sow discord in the West.

anon84873628 3y ago

I can't speak for Libertarians but I thought they were well aware of the coercive power of violence; the whole point is to build a state that does less of it...

pjc50 3y ago
As has been discovered, that doesn't prevent some other state from doing violence to you. The irony of doing this in former Yugoslavia is astonishing. Yes, states can fragment and borders can move .. at a considerable cost in human life. You can see it happening today in Nagorno-Karabakh, as well as the much more visible attempt by Russia to move the borders of Ukraine.
- anon84873628 3y ago
  Again, this is surely not a new discovery for these people. TFA is obviously their biased explanation of events. But the behavior of the Croatian authorities could still be "surprising" if it was substantially different from past interactions. E.g. lack of formal written notice.
sangnoir 3y ago
> the whole point is to build a state that does less of it A state is only a state when it can defend its territory. At the individual level, the praxis of property rights is that something belongs to you if the person with the biggest stick says it is - this is typically the state (libertarian utopia's excluded).
toofy 3y ago
[flagged]

dfee 3y ago

In the US, many libertarians are supportive of an unfettered second amendment. One reason for this support, is perhaps the explicit acknowledgment that violence trumps rules or contracts.

Barrin92 3y ago
it's not that sort of violence that matters. A bunch of provincial homesteaders with guns don't constitute an army. Any small nation that is going to survive is going to look like Israel or Taiwan, militarized, armed to the teeth, with discipline, cohesion and state capacity. One of the funniest experiments with this kind of thing I ever read was a small town in the US being overtaken by libertarians, only to succumb to... bears. (as the citizens could neither organize waste regulations, public garbage disposal, or prevent one crazy guy from feeding the bears in the first place) https://unherd.com/2020/12/libertarianism-never-ends-well/ https://unherd.com/2020/12/libertarianism-never-ends-well/
- patrickaljord 3y ago
  > Any small nation that is going to survive is going to look like Israel or Taiwan, militarized, armed to the teeth, with discipline, cohesion and state capacity. And protected and funded by the US ;)
  - zdragnar 3y ago
    So is (almost) all of Europe. Only four countries besides the US actually meet their obligations to fund NATO, and though they've given more by GDP than the US to Ukraine, it isn't by much.
    - dragonwriter 3y ago
      NATO defense spending targets aren’t an obligation (well, they aren’t a spending obligation, just an obligation to make it a policy goal to move toward a spending target) and aren’t “funding NATO”. That’s a double-misrepresentation popularized by Russian propaganda proxies seeking to sow discord in the West.